Miserable first half performance by Columbia, but they are still in the game thanks to some decent outside shooting early on by Meissner and Smith. Columbia has committed ten turnovers so far as the Lions struggle to put points on the board without any contribution at all from their big men. Patrick Tape is not playing, probably due to the injury he sustained towards the end of last night's loss at Yale. Among the missing tonight are Hanson and Bibb, neither of whom played against Yale. For whatever reason, Castlin has played very little this weekend after playing so well last week. Hickman is again having a rough night, Is game has the earmarks of a blowout loss in the second half to Brown, but Meissner, Smith and Adlesh, are giving it their all so I would not rule a possible comeback win. Of course, that means Engles would have to use a different line-up for most of the second half--Meissner, Smith, Adlesh, Castlin and Stefani.

Wow. I’ve never actually seen that play work, where the free throw shooter intentionally misses the foul shot at the end of a game, in hopes that his team will get the rebound and hit a last second shot.

cc66 don't give up yet. Despite the 3-5 record, we still have a reasonable chance of making the Ivy League Basketball Tournament this year. If my numbers are correct, we are now tied with Cornell and Princeton for fifth place, just one game behind Brown and Yale who are both 4-4. Dartmouth knocked off Princeton tonight by 16 points tonight so it is certainly possible that we could defeat Princeton at home next week. Also, the same Harvard team that we defeated, won against Penn. More than that, our two losses to Yale and Brown this weekend were both away games that could just as easily ended up as victories if Coach Engles had given more of Hickman's minutes to Stefanini. Tonight's #'s were 20 points in 27 minutes for Stefanini compared to 5 points in 22 minutes for Hickman. That's a huge disparity and clearly indicates that Engles must use Stefanini in the starting line-up instead of Hickman and then keep him on the floor for 30+ minutes. I believe Engles recognizes that now as the line-up he used for most of the second half against Brown was Smith, Stefanini, Meisner, Adlesh and Faulds/Castlin.

Brown played several minutes toward the end without their injured standout FY, Cambridge. They also suffered as a result of a jumper that should have netted 3 instead of 2 in regulation time as it seemed clear the player was beyond the line (perhaps the refs didn't have a clear look).

Some of the Lions' passes were inexplicable, thrown with defenders between the two Cs.

Obviously Engles is wedded to Hickman. He will keep giving him big minutes because he apparently sees something that nobody else does. So short of being ordered by Peter Pilling to play Stefanini in Hickman’s place we might as well content ourselves with the certain knowledge that Engles is one stubborn guy.

Tape would have made a big difference against Brown. Not having him last night was the difference between a W and an L despite my reservations about other aspects of our game. Brown would have had no answer to Tape’s length.

In summary, Stefanini is scoring at about twice Hickman's rate, meaning that the Lions are losing about six or seven points per game by not using Stefanini. Furthermore, Stefanini's field goal percentage and 3 point shooting percentage are both way above Hickman's. To be fair, Hickman is ahead of Stefanini in a few other categories such as free throw percentage, and the statistics do not show who is the better overall defender. However, from having watched all 21 Columbia basketball games this season, the impression I have is that Stefanini is a better defender than Hickman. Finally, the freshman, Stefanin, is improving substantially from game to game whereas the senior, Hickman, is not. In brief, I do respectfully submit that the Columbia coaching staff is making a serious mistake by not starting Stefanini and giving him much more playing time.

There's only one remotely plausible explanation that I can think for Engles' continued reliance on Hickman, namely, that because Hickman is a senior, the coach feels that Hickman's 4 yr long commitment to the program obligates Engles to give him the benefit of the doubt (and most of the statistics). This seemingly curious preference might be especially true because Castlin, the only other senior on the squad, has been injured so much this year, and Engles wants to play the one senior who has stuck with it.

It's just a theory, but in the absence of any other competing hypothesis, it's the only one I've got.

Maybe so, and a nice gesture if that, to a very good young man. However, I believe you would agree with me that the obligations of a head college basketball coach to everyone connected with his or her particular program, far transcend keeping one player happy. There are only six games remaining in the season and I feel that it is time for Columbia to put its strongest line-up on the floor regardless whether the players are seniors, juniors, sophomores or freshmen. Isn't that the way it's supposed to work?

Yes. Al Bagnoli puts his best players on the field. He played 15 or 20 first years if they were better than the guys in front of him. That’s what makes Al a great coach. We have four guys who were recruited by Engles who were high level prospects. Stefanini gets some minutes, Faulds less, Hanson even less, and Bibbs none. I am sure that Hickman is a great young man and an excellent athlete, but the simple fact is that he has been on a downward trajectory for over a year and is not helping the team when he is on the court. But as I said, I have a high degree of confidence that Engles couldn’t care less about the fan base.

A Doomsday scenario seem near unless Engles somehow turns things around in the next six games. We are now 3-5 in the League and 5-16 overall. Certainly, someone must care in the administration about what has happened the last two seasons. Are the few critics on this Board the only ones who care about Columbia Basketball? The next three weeks should be very interesting.

I’ve given you guys some devil’s advocate arguments on this before — namely that Hickman very clearly appears to be the team’s leader in huddles, etc., that Stefanini turns it over way too much, which means he has to eat up an alarming number of possessions to get to the counting numbers you cite (which mean absolutely nothing if other guys use those possessions more efficiently when Hickman is on the floor), and that I think Stefanini’s style defensively involves a lot of gambling that makes him look good but leaves you wondering who missed the assignment a lot.

I’ll throw out one more. When Stefanini started last weekend, he was held scoreless. It is quite possible that Engles is making a decision to have Hickman absorb the more difficult stretches of the game when the opponent’s starters are in and fresh, and then Stefanini gets the more advantageous situations against backups and/or guys who are tired. That again makes Stefanini look good, but may mean that he won’t look as good in a starting role.

Just a theory. I also will point out that Columbia and Princeton are far and away the best offensive teams in the league this year. Columbia isn’t losing because Hickman is failing to score — it is losing because the defense is one of the 50 worst in the country, and right there with Cornell for worst in the conference. So whoever is willing and able to defend should be playing. To my eye, that’s Hickman over Stefanini, though frankly it might be Hunter at that spot overall.

Yes, in general, it is more accurate to say that we are 5-16 because our defense is lousy than it is because we're missing a little more juice on offense. I assume that defense is going to be the primary off-season work, because 4 of 5 starters are coming back next year--Smith, Adlesh, Meisner, and Tape. Nevertheless, I am still not persuaded that your analysis explains Stefanini's 0 pt start, in part because the starters who you speculate might be tired did perfectly well defending against Hickman until the very moment he was sent to the bench.

I’ll also push back on this — i’m not sure the inside length advantage actually works to Columbia ‘s advantage against Brown. Certainly against Penn, it was Columbia’s movement disadvantage against Penn’s frontcourt that caused Tape and Faulds problems. Columbia had the size but couldn’t stay with Brodeur. Brown might present a similar issue despite giving up Height. Now in an OT game any additional juice helps. But that argument goes both ways — hard to know if OT happens at all if Brown’s best player is on the court down the stretch.

Stefanini played 27 mins. against Brown, 20 pts, 1 TO, Hickman played 22, 5 pts. 2 TOs. Anderson 3 with 9 seconds was overcalled as a 2 in regular time (it was clearly a 3 (I've seen pictures) so there should not have been OT. Cambridge was 0-7 from 3, but 10 of 13 from 2 and scored 23 in 30 minutes, 3 slams including a 360. 49 pts. this weekend and 61 last weekend. I hope he can play next weekend.

Usually, I agree with SomeGuy, but he must have missed the Columbia vs. Yale and Columbia vs. Brown games this weekend. As Old Bear just noted, Stefanini played 27 minutes against Brown and scored 20 points with a single turnover, while Hickman's stats were 5 points and two turnovers in 22 minutes. On defense, even if Hickman was better than Stefanini which was not the case, that could not possibly make up for the 15 point scoring differential in favor of Stefanini. No one could reasonably argue that Hickmani played better than Stefanini in the Brown game. However, it's the Friday night game against Yale that really bothers me and I would respectfully suggest that SomeGuy take a look at the replay on the Ivy League Digital Network. In brief, Engles started Hickman against Yale rather than Stefanini and the Lions fell behind Yale by double digit points before Engles brought Stefanini off the bench about midway thru the first half. With him on the court, the Lions caught up with Yale and took the lead at halftime. In the second half, with Stefanini again on the bench, Yale quickly regained the lead and kept the lead until Engles once again substituted Stefanini whereupon the Lions caught up with Yale and nearly won the game. Stefanini also played solid defense while he was in the game. In retrospect, I think Columbia made two very costly mistakes not giving Stefanini, and for that matter, Castlin, more playing time against Yale and Brown this weekend.

I watched the first half. Observations: Stefanini was +6 while on the floor, and Hickman was +4. Yes, Stefanini was in for the comeback from down 9 when he entered, but Hickman was on the floor for the whole comeback as well. Stefanini came in when Yale had Eric Monroe was in for Yale, and guarded him for the first stretch. He switched to guarding Copeland after he returned. Hickman generally had Oni. So the obvious question for starting Stefanini would be who would guard Oni/Cambridge/Betley/Town s/Stephens. A lot of tough guys to guard there for Stefanini, Adlesh, and Smith.

Second half was more one sided in Stefanini's favor. Stefanini +7, Hickman -8. Hickman never returned after the initial stretch. Same as first half -- Engles waited for backup guards for Yale to put in Stefanini. This time, no Monroe in the second half, so it was Swain who Stefanini came in to guard. Swain went off in this game, unfortunately. Then switched to zone with Stefanini and Adlesh up top, and finally, like the first half, he guarded Copeland. Did a pretty good job on Copeland generally, though he did get burned on the play where Tape got hurt.

So at least for the Yale game, Engles appeared to wait for the opponent to bring in backup guards, and then he goes to Stefanini. Stefanini starts guarding a backup, and then eventually guards a starter later in his run.

I get the argument that Hickman is a vocal senior leader and a great athlete, but can anybody honestly say that he has had a single solid game all year? To me at least Stefanini has the ability to score 20 ppg, plays hard and is not much of a downgrade from Hickman on defense.

Well, if I knew one guy would be +13 for the game and the other would be -3, i’d play the +13 that game. Not sure you can know that coming in, and while it is evident to the eyes of a lot of Columbia posters, the +/- overall is negative for both guys for the year. So I’m not sure it is obvious.

Figuring out the Defense is important too. Can Stefanini guard the 3s he would need to guard to take Hickman’s spot? They don’t seem to use him that way (he only covers small guards, seemingly, and only plays with both Adlesh and Smith when the opponent plays small).

Overall I default to Engles and try to provide some explanation as to why he does what he does. But if you are forcing me to choose a lineup, mine would be Meisner Hunter Castlin Adlesh Smith.

Okay, and I guess I should stop being surprised, but whenever you do the Columbia lineup, I still find it noteworthy that 1) you insert Hunter (is his defense really sufficient to compensate for the lack of any offense?) and 2) you ignore Tape (I know you think he's too slow, and Brodeur did beat him in the Penn game, but have you seen him recently--I think he's gotten much stronger inside?)

I’d definitely be playing Tape. As for Hunter, I think Columbia has plenty of offense. Need to mix it with some Defense. I think you can have one defensive specialist out there and still get more or less the same scoring output.

What we are really missing is not having another Isaac Cohen, a real glue guy who could defend, play like a coach on the court and when needed score some points. Hunter was apparently a prolific scorer in high school but hasn’t shown any offense at all. So I suppose that his highest and best use is to bring him off the bench in spurts to try to clamp down on whoever has the hot hand. But if we are looking for a short rotation to me it is Smith, Meisner, Castlin, Tape, Adlesh, Stefanini, Faulds and Hanson, with limited minutes for Hunter and Hickman. I had high hopes for Bibbs but he seems to be buried at the back of the bench.

I’d definitely be playing Tape. As for Hunter, I think Columbia has plenty of offense. Need to mix it with some Defense. I think you can have one defensive specialist out there and still get more or less the same scoring output.

At the risk of incurring the wrath of Chet and 37P6, I would advocate starting Hunter at the 3 next year, with a starting lineup of Smith, Adlesh, Hunter, Meisner and Tape, in the hopes that Hunter becomes that defensive glue guy that we've been missing since Cohen graduated.

Hey Murph, you were the most vocal critic of Kyle Smith on this Board during his tenure, and yet you have given a pass to his successor. How come my friend?

For me, it was mostly an issue concerning Smith's character going back to the Dyami Starks episode.

I would rather not relitigate the whole fiasco; I'm sure everyone is painfully aware of my opinion on the matter. Suffice it to say, it's hard for me to imagine that Starks was such a bad kid that he had to be buried at the end of the bench for most of the season, after having come in as one of Columbia's higher ranked recruits at the time.

Maybe someday, we'll get a coach who both wins and is also a good guy.

Don't think he's contributing enough to be called that. Isaac cohen would assist and rebound (for his height) at an incredible rate. Hickman is just a mediocre wing, who drives to the basket once in a while and can actually knock down FTs(unlike cohen). Hickman's biggest asset is longevity and loyalty to the program, but admirable but neither of which won games.